Re: flex package POSIX violation

[Steven Penny <svnpenn@gmail.com>]

On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 15:37:11, Gerrit Haase wrote:
> Maybe to 'request' something is not the best approach to resolve your issue?

yeah, sometimes it is. my original request was Dec 31 [1]. by Jan 1 [2], updated
package had been published.

> A better way to handle issues like this would be:
> you provide a patch to handle the issue and the maintainer of the
> package may then decide to incorporate your patch.

maybe you should read full threads before injecting your opinion. this advice
might hold true for larger changes - but we are literally talking about 1
symlink.

And even if that werent the case, this is open source. *I* decide my own level
of involvement, not you. if i want to make a half ass request with no effort,
that is my decision and it might take years or never for it to be implemented,
or it might be the next day as we see here. please look here [3] to see that i
am well versed on how to make a patch - cheers

[1] http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2017-12/msg00296.html
[2] http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2018-01/msg00004.html
[3] http://github.com/svnpenn


--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple